[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 76 (Tuesday, May 9, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E967-E968]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                   THE NEED FOR UNITED NATIONS REFORM

                                 ______


                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                          Tuesday, May 9, 1995
  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, there is growing pressure in the Congress 
for meaningful reforms in the United Nations system. Due to U.S. 
budgetary constraints, the need to pare down our contributions to the 
United Nations and focus our resources on its most effective programs 
has become more urgent.
  On April 7, I wrote to Secretary of State Warren Christopher urging 
high-level attention to the issue of U.N. reform. On May 4, I received 
the State Department's response.
  Because there is a high degree of congressional interest in this 
issue, I ask that this correspondence be included in the Record.

                                     U.S. Department of State,

                                      Washington, DC, May 4, 1995.
     Hon. Lee Hamilton,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Hamilton: Secretary Christopher has asked me to 
     respond to your letter of April 7 regarding our UN reform 
     efforts and the possibility that Congress will not approve 
     the full amount of our request for contributions for the UN 
     System.
       We agree that UN reform is a high priority. Like most 
     international--and national--institutions, the UN must adapt 
     to changing times if it is to succeed. Today, that means 
     learning, whenever possible, to deliver better results at a 
     lower cost. That is a goal we are working with other UN 
     members and the UN Secretariat to achieve.
       As you rightly note, this Administration has taken the lead 
     on UN reform in preparations for the Halifax Summit. We 
     believe that the Group of Seven should commit themselves to 
     improve the UN's efficiency, productivity and 
     professionalism, and to make more equitable the scale of 
     assessments for peacekeeping. We are working cooperatively 
     with our G-7 partners in an effort to reach consensus on 
     these issues and to increase the likelihood that we will gain 
     support elsewhere. It is a fact of life that real reform 
     cannot be achieved at the United Nations without broad 
     support from other countries.
       Overall, the Administration supports peacekeeping, 
     management, personnel and budgetary reforms designed to 
     produce greater value for each dollar we--and others--
     contribute to the UN. We agree with you that the success of 
     the new Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) is 
     important. A strong UN Inspector General is an essential 
     ingredient for true UN reform. We believe that the 
     appointment of Karl Paschke of Germany to this post was a 
     good choice. To help ensure his success, our own Inspector 
     General has agreed to detail a member of our OIG staff to the 
     UN. We have also forwarded to the OIOS the names of several 
     Americans for the position of Principal Investigator. We are 
     doing our best to see that OIOS is adequately funded, and we 
     appreciate the support you have shown for our efforts.
       OIOS has the authority already to undertake audits and 
     investigations of separately administered UN organs such as 
     UNDP, UNICEF, and UNEP. We have recently taken steps to 
     pursue the institutionalization of an ``IG-type'' function in 
     the specialized agencies, beginning with the largest--UNIDO, 
     IAEA, FAO, WHO, and ILO. We believe there is no 
     organizational substitute for an oversight mechanism modeled 
     after the UN Secretariat's OIOS, which affords the qualities 
     of accountability, transparency, and operational independence 
     to the membership of these organizations.
       In addition, following up on President Clinton's proposal 
     at last fall's UN General Assembly, we are working with the 
     President of the General Assembly to establish a special 
     high-level working group to review existing studies on UN 
     reform for the purpose of developing a practical strategy for 
     implementing key recommendations on a timely basis.
       We still believe that the Administration's budget request 
     to meet our commitments to the United Nations and other 
     international 
     [[Page E968]] organizations is essential to our national 
     interests. However, if our requests are not met, we will act 
     to preserve U.S. leadership where it counts most.
       Let us share with you some of our thoughts and actions as 
     we prepare for that possibility:
       First, we are continuing to closely scrutinize peacekeeping 
     budgets, especially as we take factors from Presidential 
     Decision Directive 25 (PDD-25) into consideration. For 
     example, we limited operations in Georgia and Tajikistan to a 
     small number of military observers, a relatively inexpensive 
     means of maintaining a UN monitoring presence. The UN Mission 
     for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) has continued 
     longer than we expected and has encountered several delays in 
     achieving its objectives. Recently, however, the parties have 
     demonstrated a commitment to the process and real gains have 
     been made in registering and identifying potential voters, 
     the first step necessary for holding the referendum. We agree 
     with you that we cannot continue to support an operation that 
     does not accomplish its goals and is not cost-effective. We 
     will review MINURSO's progress in all areas to determine if 
     it should be terminated or if an extension should be granted 
     and a referendum can be successfully held.
       Second, we are examining the ways and means of withdrawing 
     from some organizations whose activities are of lesser 
     priority to us.
       Third, we are pushing for UN agency and other international 
     organization budgets for the coming biennium that are below 
     the zero real growth rate we have historically supported.
       Fourth, we are actively reviewing options for reducing 
     waste, decreasing costs and improving performance through the 
     possible consolidation of agencies and programs where that is 
     possible.
       Fifth, we are opposing the scheduling under UN auspices of 
     new global conferences or summits (and note that each of the 
     conferences this Administration has participated in was 
     scheduled prior to 1993).
       Finally, we are prepared to signal to organizations in 
     which we continue to participate that U.S. withdrawal from 
     some is possible if they are unwilling to undertake needed 
     reforms.
       In the context of considering how we can pare down our 
     contributions while limiting damage to our leadership, it is 
     important to recognize that in the case of most UN 
     organizations, we are obligated either by the terms of the 
     treaty or other international agreement establishing the 
     organization or by general principles of international law to 
     pay assessment through calendar year 1996, even if we notify 
     our intent to withdraw now. We also remain similarly 
     obligated for arrears from previous withholdings.
       We note, as well, that a number of the activities you cite 
     specifically in your letter fall within the core programs of 
     the UN Secretariat; these are not separate organizations from 
     which we can ``withdraw.'' Any decision on our part to reduce 
     our contributions in an amount equal to our share of such an 
     activity would simply be carried on the books by the UN as an 
     arrearage to the organization as a whole. This underlines the 
     importance of gaining UN member support and understanding for 
     any actions that we might take.
       Many UN activities are important to us; so is the success 
     of the organization as a whole. There is a grave risk that 
     substantial budget reductions will harm our leverage and 
     leadership within the UN system. We must be frank about the 
     possibility that substantial damage to our interests will 
     result. Nowhere is this more clearly illustrated than with 
     peacekeeping operations which provide us options in between 
     doing nothing and going it alone. The strategy of this 
     Administration is to make the case for our budget as 
     persuasively as we can, and to develop a plan for minimizing 
     harm to our interests should the reductions nevertheless 
     occur. In doing so, we want to emphasize that Congress must 
     allow us to decide where to cut and not tie our hands by 
     earmarking funds. We welcome your support and counsel with 
     respect to this strategy.
       As a matter of policy, we want to see a leaner, less-
     costly, more productive United Nations. We are making 
     progress in this direction. Our prospects will be better,
      however, if it is clear to our allies and those around the 
     world that our emphasis is on helping international 
     organizations to work better, rather than on reducing 
     costs to ourselves regardless of consequences. One 
     approach reflects the essence of leadership; the other 
     retreats from it.
       It is not possible to paint a comprehensive picture of our 
     thinking on this important issue in one letter. Accordingly, 
     we would be happy to discuss this with you in more detail or 
     put together a briefing team to meet with you at your 
     convenience.
       Thank you again for your provocative and timely letter, and 
     for your continued leadership and support.
           Sincerely,

                                             Wendy R. Sherman,

                                              Assistant Secretary,
                                              Legislative Affairs.
                                  ____

                                                  Committee on    
                                          International Relations,


                                     House of Representatives,

                                    Washington, DC, April 7, 1995.
     Hon. Warren Christopher,
     Secretary of State, Department of State, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman. I write to urge you to continue to give 
     your personal attention to the issue of reforming the United 
     Nations.
       I know you face many crises every day, and there is much 
     which demands your attention. But U.N. reform has become a 
     serious and urgent issue because of pending Congressional 
     budget cuts for the U.N.
       I believe this Administration generally has the right 
     policy on U.N. reform. I also commend the Administration for 
     the efforts undertaken thus far, such as establishing an 
     office of Inspector General at the United Nations. Your 
     efforts to put U.N. reform on the agenda for the upcoming 
     summit in Halifax is an excellent way to demonstrate our 
     seriousness of purpose on this issue. We need to keep pushing 
     for concrete action to implement our U.N. reform policy.
       It is quite possible if not likely that hundreds of 
     millions of dollars are going to be cut from the U.N. budget, 
     both assessed and voluntary. Supporters of the U.N. and 
     peacekeeping will not be able to stop these cuts, and I doubt 
     the Administration can veto them at the end of the day.
       The Congress will be faced with the tough choice of either 
     cutting indiscriminately across the board, or deciding which 
     U.N. programs are most important to us, and trying to save 
     those programs by de-funding or withdrawing from those which 
     are less important.
       I believe the second option is the proper one. It is better 
     to have a smaller, more effective United Nations than a 
     crippled and ineffective United Nations.
       Reforming the U.N. is so tough that it will require 
     sustained, high-level attention. Ambassador Albright, who is 
     doing an excellent job in a critical assignment, needs your 
     continued, full support and the support of the President on 
     U.N. reform.
       I would urge you to take the following steps.
       First, the G-7 reform initiative is a good step, but this 
     step needs to be tightly focused, and coordinated with US/UN 
     reform efforts. The state Department might want to consider 
     some sort of Task Force on U.N. reform, perhaps on an inter-
     agency basis.
       Second, the Administration must decide its priorities in 
     the U.N. assessed and voluntary budgets, and communicate 
     those to Congressional Democrats. I would suggest that we 
     closely examine whether we still need UNCTAD, UNIDO, the 
     regional U.N. economic commissions, the ILO, and the FAO. The 
     funding crisis is reaching the point where we must consider 
     withdrawal from, or de-funding of, some of these activities.
       Third, we must be prepared to push for a stronger U.N. 
     Inspector General. He should have authority over the whole 
     U.N. system, as well as adequate, trained staff and a 
     reasonable budget. And, his reports must be made available, 
     unchanged, to Members States. This has not yet happened, to 
     my knowledge.
       Fourth, we must give greater scrutiny to U.N. peacekeeping 
     budgets. And, you must consider whether we can continue to 
     vote for operations, which are very expensive and have 
     operated for years without tangible progress, such as MINURSO 
     in the Western Sahara.
       All of these efforts will require close coordination with 
     other major donor countries, as you have recognized through 
     the G-7 initiate. We must continue working hard with those 
     countries in order to make these reforms happen.
       We will likely face these issues in a HIRC markup in early 
     May. If the Administration doesn't decide on its priorities 
     and let Democrats try to help you support them, Republicans 
     will make these decisions for you. The only line of defense 
     against those who want to destroy the U.N. is to reform it. 
     But it must be real reform in order to get votes for U.N. 
     funding.
       I appreciate your consideration of this letter, and I stand 
     ready to work with you in any way I can to help make these 
     reforms happen. I would stress once again the gravity and 
     urgency of these problems, and urge that we press ahead on 
     U.N. reform efforts.
       With best regards,
           Sincerely,
                                                  Lee H. Hamilton,
                                        Ranking Democratic Member.
     

                          ____________________